12:47pm Thursday 17th May 2012
SIR – The Worcester News has brought to the attention of its readers the extortionate cost of electing its 35 city councillors (May 14).
I have been complaining about this for more than 25 years.
In my election statement as printed in the Worcester News just before this year’s local election I said: “If all city councillors were paid just £20 per week it would save £150,000 per year.”
When I last served on the council I requested that my allowances be paid to local charities (the proof is in the council records).
When we read that there has been no increase in the attendance allowance paid to councillors over the past three or four years it is an insult to the intelligence of the electorate.
Quite frankly, the councillors have been overpaid for years.
There are several city councillors who are also county councillors.
Add their county council allowances to their city council allowances and it becomes obvious why many of our elected representatives do not have a proper job, they can live off their allowances.
To make matters worse there have been certain households where husband and wife are city councillors and one or other has been a county councillor. What a nice little number that is.
I have the greatest respect for the old Labour and traditional Conservatives who represented the electorate for the honour, not the money.
I have said it before and I say it again: I suspect many councillors are there for the money CARL HUMPHRIES
Chairman, UKIP Worcester branch
© Copyright 2001-2013 Newsquest Media Group